Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Photos in the park.

249 replies

Percyfish3rd · 17/06/2021 16:15

I recently took my 3 year old granddaughter to the park, and took some photos of her on the slide. As we were leaving a woman said "excuse me, I saw you taking some photos, of that little girl. My daughter was in some of them 8n the background. 8 want you to delete the photos. If you don't I' ll call the police, it's illegal to take photos of other peoples children". I pointed out to her it wasn't illegal, and I'd rather keep the photos. Her husband then joined us, and said as I was using a " professional camera" (there is no such thing) he would shove it into a part of my anatomy I won't mention. I decided to delete them, after all they would be easy enough to recover at home, but how many people would have done the same thing as this couple, even though the photos weren't specifically of their child?

OP posts:
AlternativePerspective · 18/06/2021 09:48

Risk management isn’t about ‘we can’t eliminate all risks so let’s not bother trying to avoid any’. but not allowing the child to walk past CCTV is a risk you can manage and where you know your child is going to be photographed. Whereas taking the child to the park you have no idea where the child may be photographed or where that picture may end up. As I said upthread, parents could be doing facebook live video’s of their child where the other child happens to be in the background, and then it is too late to do anything about it. People could be sharing that child far and wide by the time the parent is aware it’s even happening.

Unfortunately parents just have no choice but to accept that their child will appear in other people’s pictures. Official school/nursery pictures are different, they can request from the outset that those pictures are not taken, but we live in an age now where everyone has a camera, and everyone has the right to use that camera in a public place, and realistically the only way to ensure that your children never appear in pictures is to keep them away from public places, which isn’t realistic, so parents do need to accept that their children will appear in pictures on a daily basis and there is nothing they can do to prevent it.

UrAWizHarry · 18/06/2021 09:48

@PurpleDaisies

The arseholes approaching the op have no right to ask anyone to delete photos that they or their kids might be in the background of, and they certainly don't get to go around threatening people with violence.

Everyone (almost) has agreed they had no legal right to demand the photos deleted. Everyone agrees their aggressive behaviour is unacceptable.

I don’t agree that carers can’t politely ask for a photo to be deleted if their child is in it, knowing that it would be done out of courtesy rather than obligation.

Wouldn’t most people who aren’t arseholes do that knowing people sometimes have good reasons to worry about their child being in someone else’s picture that they have no control over?

They didn't ask politely, and people who look after kids who are actually at risk are well versed in the relative risks associated with certain activities and how to deal with them. If there was a concern you don't make a scene, you just discretely ask for the photo to be removed, cropped or the face blurred out.

The child being in the background of a photo of another random kid barely registers as a risk anyway.

UrAWizHarry · 18/06/2021 09:49

@DeathByWalkies

Legally you were in the right, and they were probably nutters who have bizarre ideas about what sort of photos paedophiles are interested in.

But at the back of my mind there's the thought that this could have been a child who, for instance, is adopted and if their birth family managed to find a picture of them and track them down, there would be a genuine threat.

Which they aren't going to do. How many pictures of random kids do you think exist on the internet? Do you think there is enough time in the day to hunt through them all on the offchance you might see someone in the background and be able to both identify them and where they are?
AlternativePerspective · 18/06/2021 10:07

I wonder how many of the posters telling the OP she is unreasonable actually have adopted children who are at risk if captured on camera and would do the same and how many are just virtue signallers who want to be seen to be looking forward.

Bitofachinwag · 18/06/2021 10:17

UrAWizHarry but you don't need to look through thousands of photos of you already have one! You can use that one to find others (can't remember what that's called) on the internet.

Gullible2021 · 18/06/2021 10:17

@PassionfruitOrangeGuava

No, it’s not possible to guarantee you can prevent it 100% of the time. But if you see someone taking photos of your child you’re well within your rights to ask for them to delete it, even if they don’t have to comply. I think we’re both aware the situation isn’t as black and white as you’re making out, and there’s space here for empathy and understanding.

I don’t really understand the mindset of ‘don’t have to delete so shan’t’ that some posters are espousing. Seems a little obstinate when the alternative (deleting them and taking more without the child in the frame) is straightforward enough.

Maybe it's because most of us have actually read the OPs post and understood she didn't take pictures of their child!

She took pictures of her grandchild, on a slide.

While another child was near the slide.

And in fact was only partly visible in one picture.

Why should she delete pictures solely of her grandchild? Or even one picture, again of her grandchild, where another kids arm or leg or the back of their head etc might just be visible if you look hard enough but is not the subject of the picture?

She didn't go around taking random pictures of other people's children. Or of her grandchild playing with another child. Or on a swing next to another child (as someone suggested).

It's not realistic or reasonable to expect that no pictures of people's own family can ever be taken in the same public space (park, theme park, holiday destination) as other people's children on the vague chance a part of the strangers anatomy or a blurry out of focus image might appear in the background. None of us would have holiday or theme park images if that was the case.

A clearly identifiable and purposely taken image of someone elses child - fine to ask to delete. A concern that a LAC/adopted/vulnerable child might have inadvertantly ended up in the background of someone else photo and could be identifiable? Perfectly reasonable to politely ask if the child is in shot and if so could they be cropped or blurred out for their protection. No one would dispute that in these circumstances it's fine to ask and most reasonable people would crop out, blur etc.

But a scenario like the OP described, with aggressive parents who threatened violence because she took pictures of her own grandchild and they thought their kid could have ended up visible and actually wasn't at all - is ridiculous and I wouldn't be pandering to aggressive, violent and paranoid people who cannot bear other people taking pictures of their family members even near their kid. Let's face it, the camera had a focus lens, the grandchild was most likely at the bottom of the slide or the top of the slide. The other kid would either be totally out of shot (OP zoomed in on her grandchild at the bottom of the slide, other kid at the top of the slide not in shot) or partly visible ( queuing at the bottom of the slide, a hand or a top of head if stood behind Ops grandchild at the top of the slide). The parents, instead of watching the whole thing unfold and then challenging OP at the end, could have, at the time said "Please can you hold on one second, it's important our child doesn't end up in the background of your photos" and made sure she wasn't visible. But they didn't. Nor did they take the steps to ascertain that their kid was even IN or indentifiable in these pictures before demanding deletion and behaving aggressively towards the OP and falsely accusing her of breaking the law. Again...they demanded she delete pictures that their child wasn't even in.

Yes, I have a very hard time empathising with that. I think they should have been reported to the police.

Sparklingwine1 · 18/06/2021 10:24

You didn't know the reasons why they felt so strongly about having those pictures deleted. Adoption, fostering, domestic violence, witness protection etc.
They shouldn't have been rude I agree. but you should have deleted the pics straight away just because it's the decent thing to do.

khakiandcoral · 18/06/2021 10:35

but you should have deleted the pics straight away just because it's the decent thing to do.

their child wasn't even on the pictures Confused

Constellationstation · 18/06/2021 11:19

**Their child wasn’t even on the pictures Confused

But they didn’t know that though did they? Because instead of telling them that the OP just told them that she’d rather keep the pictures

AutoGroup · 18/06/2021 11:24

There was a huge fuss in our local paper recently when a woman complained about "Eastern European" men taking pictures of children in the park. Police were called and found no crime was committed.

Meanwhile people commenting on the story found that her FB had publicly accessible photos of her children, in swimwear no less.

jellybeansforbreakfast · 18/06/2021 11:41

@Quaggars

Can those saying "not illegal" or whatever not see that it can be a safety risk to others? Whether it be a family member you're escaping from, or whatever? Why would you want your child's photo potentially on FB? As, let's face it that's where a lot of photos end up. As in an innocuous "at the park" post. Innocuous for you, yes, but not for those who you've got in your photo. Plus lots of mutuals in your friends list who might see the photo and pass it on/details. "Oh I saw your Freddie in a photo the other day" To the person/people you're staying away from for whatever reason. Sounds paranoid, but happens, which is why schools have strict social media policies regarding other peoples kids. Doesn't apply to me, but it's empathy and understanding others and that not everyone's the same situation.
Some of us know only too well what the pitfalls can be and have posted in support of OP!

Empathy does not mean aquiescing to all sorts of emotionally laden "just in case" scenarios.

And a polite request is most likely to get results, not threats, or any of the imagined scenarios posters seem to think are so very common.

User574664 · 18/06/2021 11:43

They were rude , but I don’t think you should take photos with other people’s children in the background. You don’t know if the child is adopted or just escaped abusive parents and they don’t want them posted on social media and there location identified . It annoys me as well when Influencers video there child at the park or soft play and other children are around and they post to millions on Instagram I think it’s so rude and weird. I wouldn’t post Or take a photo with another child in.

yourestandingonmyneck · 18/06/2021 12:20

@PurpleDaisies

You should have deleted the photos when they asked.
You having a laugh?

Don't be so ridiculous. If someone is taking photos of their child and someone else is in the background so be it. Should she have asked the family to vacate the park first?

UrAWizHarry · 18/06/2021 12:38

@User574664

They were rude , but I don’t think you should take photos with other people’s children in the background. You don’t know if the child is adopted or just escaped abusive parents and they don’t want them posted on social media and there location identified . It annoys me as well when Influencers video there child at the park or soft play and other children are around and they post to millions on Instagram I think it’s so rude and weird. I wouldn’t post Or take a photo with another child in.
If you are in public it's not rude to take a photo that another person might be in the background of. It's just not. If the risk to this kid is so great then maybe they shouldn't be at a sodding playpark to start with.
maddening · 18/06/2021 12:58

I would have said I am happy to wait while they call the police.

AutoGroup · 18/06/2021 13:20

I think, had the police been called, they would have asked you to delete the pictures. There'd be no law under which they could insist but they would have asked you to consider the other party's request/reasons and do it anyway.

NoIDontWatchLoveIsland · 18/06/2021 13:26

Photos in public places are fine

Gullible2021 · 18/06/2021 13:26

@AutoGroup

I think, had the police been called, they would have asked you to delete the pictures. There'd be no law under which they could insist but they would have asked you to consider the other party's request/reasons and do it anyway.
You think the police would have asked her to delete pictures of her granchild that had no other kids in all of the pictures bar one that had one partially visible and thus probably not identifiable child in? Really?

I think the police would have told the other to stop threatening violence and move along as the OP had broke no law at all and was allowed to take pictures of her grandchild on a slide.

NoIDontWatchLoveIsland · 18/06/2021 13:43

The police would not and could not ask you to delete photographs taken in a public place, unless those photographs were indecent. We have rights in the UK and these are among them.

NoIDontWatchLoveIsland · 18/06/2021 13:44

Most people do of course try to avoid others appearing in the background but they are not legally required to.

AlternativePerspective · 18/06/2021 18:12

I think, had the police been called, they would have asked you to delete the pictures. There'd be no law under which they could insist but they would have asked you to consider the other party's request/reasons and do it anyway. no they absolutely wouldn’t The OP took pictures of her child which the other child might have been in the background.

The police would hopefully have told the other party to stop being so threatening and that they would be arrested of arrest for assault if they carried out their threats, and to stop wasting police time. Police have actual crimes to deal with. If the parents are that paranoid then yes, the child shouldn’t be out in public.

But I suspect the parents were just arseholes and the only people the child was at risk from is them.

Hesma · 18/06/2021 20:53

The husband was totally out of order,hope you’re ok. However there may have been genuine safeguarding concerns behind them asking you to delete the photos and they may have been worried about them appearing on social media.

DancesWithTortoises · 19/06/2021 10:33

If you go to a tourist destination or National Trust place it's virtually impossible to take souvenir photos of your visit without children in the background.

If parents are determined their children will not be photographed they should either keep them close by their side ready to remove them if they see photos being taken or just not go.

I'd prefer not to have people in my photos but in busy places there is no choice,

seashells11 · 19/06/2021 17:23

It's amazing though how the police will turn up promptly if someone reports anyone filming in public places,(a perfectly legal activity) but nowhere to be seen for an actual crime.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page